Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Wally: Do me a favor--check out the article in the New York Times--it deals with textbooks and History--I am sure you will find it unusual. I was aware of Texas, but not California--thanks.WillyD
Wally–and anyone else:Check out today's NY Times--article about Texas, textbooks, accuracy and political correctness--apt!WillyD
As we know nothing about the parents the percentage tells us exactly zero. Flesh out the demographics and provide some data and we may begin to get a handle on whether the statistic is useful.But we do know certain things about the parents:They are "with children in elementary or secondary school". Also, "After the calls are completed, the raw data is processed through a weighting program to insure that the sample reflects the overall population in terms of age, race, gender, political party, and other factors."AHA!
As we know nothing about the parents the percentage tells us exactly zero. Flesh out the demographics and provide some data and we may begin to get a handle on whether the statistic is useful.
An alternative you supplied–noted (takes pill). History should always be challenged.I have never listened to or read anything Mr. Beck ever said. I cannot.My problem is that when I look at him I have a feeling of revulsion as he looks exactly like a man inmy neighborhood when I was a child. The man was a child molester. The problem is mine and i make no assertion about Mr. Beck--it is just a combination of his looks and my historical inclination.
Hear hear! One of the real gaps in our historical knowledge, and it is a huge gap, is the place of theOttoman Empire in European history from the 14th to the 20 centuries. The Turks had an astonishingEmpire. They were a rich, talented and warlike people with customs that both repelled and attractedWestern observers. They occupied a strategic position athwart one of the biggest trade routes in the worldplanted themselves as rulers of much of the middle east as we know itand at the same time were, for a short while, the greatest military and naval power in Europe.All this and our history books consider them to be peripheral and treat them as such. Theirs is an astounding story which ought to be read, taught and appreciated.
Agreed and with your same lack of an adequate answer. I have read some French, Italian and German works in translation that were truly awful. I believe that a good translation can make even a poorly written book better. Perhaps the fact that the authors you mention are writing in our (sic) languagehas a bearing. I will have to dwell upon this a bit.WillyD
Oh Wally–you vex me so!Glenn Beck - Current Events & Politics - Glenn Beck's Recommended ...Feb 18, 2010 ... I think it's a must read for every American. But I was looking, I was checking ... for daring to write a real critique of American history writing. ... I do not suggest that the Patriot's History is a perfect book or it ...
Bismarck, like Hitler thought Austria was filled with untermenschen–Slavs, Jews and people like that–not good God fearing Christian Germans as they had in Prussia.
The Kaiser was not responsible for the war–he was a weak man with lots of problems, not the least of which was his love/hate relationship with England. Near the end he was elated that war was going to be avoided–he was wrong of course.
To steal from the best is a wise decision–Joseph Conrad–Heart of Darkness–not speaking of historical readability, but of a worse thing–Leopold!the horror--the horror (13 commas)!!!!!!!!!
My considered opinion is that Bismarck is much maligned if anyone blames him for the conflicts of the 20th Century. He was a Conservative junker who had limited aims and realized that although short localized wars might be to Prussia's advantage, a long drawn out war would not be in the best interestsof the new German Empire. As Wally had suggested Bismarck would have slapped silly Willy down ifthat unfortunate fellow even considered giving Austria a blank check. As many of you know Bismarck was prescient when he said a general conflict would probably start "over some foolish thing in the Balkans."That may not be an absolute quote, but it is close. My brain aches when I push the memory button.WillyD
Wally: I am becoming even more senile. I do not see the paragraph or sentence that states that the guarantee is NOT a territorial guarantee, but only comes into play if there is an actual military invasion. I must be missing something.Willy D
SCOIUT:BINGO:Anita J. Prazmowska, Britain, Poland and the Eastern Front, 1939, Cambridge University Press, 1987, ISBN 0-521-33148-XWillyD
Polish-British Common Defence PactFrom Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaBritish embassy in Warsaw, PolandBritish embassy in Warsaw, PolandThe Polish-British Common Defence Pact was an annex to the Franco-Polish Military Alliance signed on August 25, 1939 between representatives of the United Kingdom and Poland. The pact contained promises of mutual military assistance between the nations in the event either was attacked by another European country. The United Kingdom, sensing a dangerous trend of German expansionism, sought to prevent German aggression by this show of solidarity.The pact was preceded by a written "guarantee" of military assistance, issued by the governments of France and Great Britain to those of Germany and Poland on March 30. Both the guarantee and the pact were directed specifically against a possible German invasion and pledged to defend Polish independence. At the time Adolf Hitler was demanding cession of the port of Danzig, military access to the Polish Corridor, and special privileges for the German minority within Poland. By the terms of the military alliance with Great Britain and France, it was left to Poland to decide whether to compromise as the pact did not include any statement of the British commitment to the Polish territorial integrity.[1] Fearing all-out German invasion no matter what, the Poles rejected the German demands.Note penultimate sentence.WillyD
